Downie v. Herman and Herman et al, No. 2:2021cv00287 - Document 19 (S.D. Tex. 2022)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying 7 Motion to Appoint ; denying 9 Motion to Appoint ; denying 2 Motion to Appoint.(Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock) Parties notified.(jmarks, 2)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Downie v. Herman and Herman et al Doc. 19 United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARCUS DOWNIE, Plaintiff, v. HERMAN AND HERMAN, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § April 08, 2022 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-CV-00287 OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL Plaintiff Marcus Downie, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s motions for appointment of counsel. (Doc. Nos. 2, 7, 9.) In a separate order, the undersigned granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. No. 17.) The order provided that “[n]o motions for appointment of counsel shall be filed until the Court has completed its screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which may include a hearing under Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985).” Id. at ¶ 9. As part of the screening process, the undersigned has issued a Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R), recommending that this action be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff will have an opportunity to file objections to the M&R. This Court, therefore, has yet to complete the screening process in this case. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions for appointment of counsel (Doc. Nos. 2, 7, 9) are DENIED without prejudice to renew should this case not be dismissed after the screening process has been completed. 1/2 Dockets.Justia.com SIGNED on April 8, 2022. _____________________________ MITCHEL NEUROCK United States Magistrate Judge 2/2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
